Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffRas22
schererboy, what in the world besides anti-thayer bias would make you think gallo is worse than chandler?
ppl on here love to underrate gallo bc thayer overrates him so much (mostly in jest) but he's been really ****ing good this year on offense
59.6 TS% this year getting to the line 6 times a game when he's shooting 3% worse than his career 3 pt shooting % is really really good, i mean he's running bad from 3 and still is much more efficient than chandler (54.7%) despite chandler shooting 3% better from 3 this year than his career avg
chandler has the game of a superstar-- what i mean by that is his style is the type of the elite scorers (anthony/james/kobe etc)-- he needs the ball in his hands to max his value, he's a solid finisher around the rim, etc. the problem is he just isn't that good, he's a bulk scorer who doesn't get to the ft line that much (2.4 times per game)
he really isn't close to as good as gallo (i know win shares aren't perfect but gallo: 4.9, chandler: 3.7)
OK. Well I'll start by totally agreeing that Gallo is better at getting to the line. And I stated that before too.
However, that is the only thing he is better at. How can you say Gallo is "running bad" from 3's? Do you even watch the Knicks play? He takes terrible shots. The guy doesn't pass up a corner-to-wing 3 ptr. He only shoots 41% from the field. Chandler shoots 46%. Neither is a great rebounder, so they could be a wash there.
But do you even account for defense here? Gallo is a total liability. Knicks announcers (Mainly Walt) actually make fun of him, bc of how poor he is on that end. While Chandler is pretty damn good on defense. Especially his help D. His D is so superior to Gallo's that I think it easily makes him a better player. And since their offensive stats are quite similar, that should be enough to prove he's better. And I'm not a big stats person, but when you compare players in tz, stats are all the rage.
Forget the stats, and just watch them play on both ends. I think it'll be clear enough.